Archives
Archives
| From: | Adam Carter <adamcarter3@×××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | "gentoo-user@l.g.o" <gentoo-user@l.g.o> | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] busybox fsck vs. fsck.ext4 ... experiences? | ||
| Date: | Fri, 31 Mar 2017 05:30:19 | ||
| Message-Id: | CAC=wYCHqcmiNK3xkUJRphU-b7jAfqQyLs2YM-YHzrLg23YTpdQ@mail.gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] busybox fsck vs. fsck.ext4 ... experiences? by tuxic@posteo.de | ||
| 1 | Wikipedia says "*BusyBox* is software that provides several stripped-down Unix |
| 2 | tools <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unix_commands> in a |
| 3 | single executable |
| 4 | file <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executable_file>." |
| 5 | |
| 6 | Its also statically linked, so you dont need any libraries; |
| 7 | $ file /bin/busybox |
| 8 | /bin/busybox: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), |
| 9 | statically linked, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, stripped, with debug_info |
| 10 | |
| 11 | > |
| 12 | The fsck.*'s are built in |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] busybox fsck vs. fsck.ext4 ... experiences? | Nils Freydank <nils.freydank@××××××.de> |